Telegram from Dean Acheson to the US Embassy in Paris (Washington, 19 October1949)

Caption: On 19 October 1949, in anticipation of the meeting of US Ambassadors in Paris, the US Secretary of State,

Dean Acheson, writes a note in which he sets out the essential elements required to promote European economic

integration and emphasises France’s leadership role in this matter.

Source: Foreign Relations of the United States, 1949. Volume IV: Western Europe. Washington: Department of State,

1975. . page:469-472.

Copyright: United States of America Government Printing Office

URL:

http://www.cvce.eu/obj/telegram_from_dean_acheson_to_the_us_embassy_in_paris_washington_19_october_1949-en-

ef456d4c-b0cc-4a98-a496-586b8ccb19b5.html

Publication date: 30/01/2013

1 / 6 30/01/2013

2 / 6 30/01/2013

MEETING OF UNITED STATES AMBASSADORS AT PARIS, OCTOBER 21-22, TO DISCUSS MAJOR DEVELOPMENTS RELATING TO EUROPE

MO.OO/10-1849: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Embassy in France

SECRET us URGENT WASHINGTON, October 19, 1940—8 p. m. 4013. For Perkins. 1 I have reviewed the problem of closer interna­

tional association in the Western world, and suggest the following considerations for your discussion of this topic with the chiefs of mission in your Paris meeting and request prompt report of your discussions on this subject. I will also discuss this subject, if possible, with Hoffman 2 before his departure.

It is not yet clear what is the most desirable ultimate pattern of deeper international association of the US, British Commonwealth, and Europe, and I do not believe that anyone should blueprint a course far ahead with any great rigidity. Ties among all these countries have been becoming closer in many ways, and I believe that we and the other nations concerned should continue to develop and strengthen these overall ties, using for this purpose the Atlantic Pact organization, the OEEC, and other institutions, such as GATT, ITO, IMF, and other UN instrumentalities. However, it also appears important and, in my opinion, urgent to parallel this lino of action with progress toward more intimate integration within this wide framework of as many countries as possible. By this, I have in mind developments going beyond the existing cooperative and collaborative forms of the Atlantic Pact and OEEC. This progress toward integration should be con­sistent with and, in fact, contributory to a further strengthening of ties among all "Western countries. It should also not commit us to patterns of organization which irrevocably exclude or include the U S and other countries not initially participating.

A dominant consideration underlying the belief that integration is needed is the problem of Western Germany. The character of Western Germany and of its relations to its neighbors is rapidly being molded.

1 George W. Perkins, Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs • Paul G. Hoffman, Administrator for Economic Cooperation.

469

3 / 6 30/01/2013

There a.v signs that it is already Inking a famil iar and ( W , nationalist n u n . Th is t rend must be expected to continue u n l ^ ' r v * 8

man resources and energies can be harnessed to the security a n d "J" fare of Western Europe us a whole. T h e danger is tha t the t i i n c £ arrest and reverse this t rend is a l ready very short . This c o n s i d e r weighs heavily in our th inking . E G A also believes tha t integration i s

necessary if Europe is to achieve viabili ty. Without, challenging this view and while recognizing t h a t economic integrat ion should greatly assist necessary economic adjustments , I believe tha t this argument should not be misinterpreted to mean t h a t the solution of the dollar payments problem lies solely or necessarily p r imar i ly in integration.

The key to progress towards integrat ion is in F 'rench hands. In mv opinion France needs, in the interests of her own future, to take the initiative promptly and decisively if the character of Western Ger­many is to be one permi t t ing heal thy development in Western Europe. Even with the closest possible relat ionship of the U S and the UK to the continent, France and France alone can take the decisive leader­ship in integrat ing Western Germany into Western Europe .

If France can make this effort, it can be sure of our support and encouragement and every safeguard we can reasonably be asked to provide. We envisage a development and s t rengthening of US ties with Europe, but for the period immediately ahead ties short of those needed among the European countries. W e will encourage the UK to move as far and as fast as it can in s t rengthening its ties with the continent, though we recognize tha t there are good reasons why the U K feels that it would have to stop short of steps involving merger of sovereignty at this time. The Dept for example is prepared to con­sider some form of membership in the O E E C . I t is also prepared to see a strengthening of the O E E C along lines permi t t ing action by less than unanimous decision and perhaps to b r ing O E E C into some kind of institutional arrangement with the Council of Europe, if these moves prove desirable. I t is also anxious to see much greater progress toward liberalization of t rade and payments among all O E E C coun-I ries and other action to carry out the. mutual aid pledges of the O E E C convention. We will certainly not acquiesce in any Brit ish attempts to obstruct integration; to the contrary, we will use our influence with the U K to secure its cooperation and collaboration along all these lines.

Inability of the U S and possibly of the U K and of other countries to join at this time in actions involving some merger of sovereignty should not debar sonic countries from such progress. I wish par­ticularly to emphasize tha t this does not and must not mean any weakening of U S or U K ties with Europe and does not mean "leaving France alone, on the continent.'" ( In foot, what we are suggesting is movement along two lines: first, a strengthening and development of

4 / 6 30/01/2013

«­ as far as р

Ksraiive action by the OS, British С е д ш а м Ш . •. j ** setmiti, дк** шасздиироа* arrangemeiij& where tKr»*. j r *

progress along tae two lines shook fjand ia hand and each reinforce th rinental countries are in some respects more urges lulling and seem to me to require seen action, even if ti that its participation most be less than complete. I n some fiek for some purposes, substantial progress toward the establishment of supra­national institutions, as well as arrangements for the freer movement of persons, axe needed soon.

With specific reference to the memorandum Bkseil has brougfci. ш Paris. 3 the Dept regards i t as a useful analysts of the problems need­

ing action on a supra­national basis and of possible forms of supra­

national organizations to deal with these problems, but believes that the specific provisions and time­table suggested require careful te­

ther analysis and that further it is much too precise a blueprint to be put forward as a considered U S Govt proposal for action. Rather we feel that the Europeans must themselves analyze the problems sad develop the institutions to handle these problems, and that the I S should confine itself, as in the case of EKP. to friendly advice and assistance. We should avoid committing ourselves to Йж public, the Congress, and the Europeans about such a definitive statement of the problem and i ts solution in order that failure by the Europeans to tabe this action will not appear to be a failure of US policy or a justifica­

tion for discontinuing E B P aid. We therefore request yon to inform Bissell that the Dept believes it would be unwise to submit the memo­

randum to representatives of OEEC or other govts, ami trust that it will be used only as background for U S officials in discussing the problems and possibleforms of organization.

At the same time, however, only a definitive beginning in the near future along these lines appears to offer hope for such a r a d i c a l

c h s

^ i n the climate in which these countries are trying to wort out problems as to reverse incipient divisive nationalist trends on me *• _ > л «и* the nnrnOS«ftS imem, to create a structure strong enougn to earrj да» T j * of the Atlantic Pact and resist threats from the East, and to permit constructive German participation in continental affairs in teres* of Western Europe as a whole. I repeat that the UK saouM participate to the extent that it is willing and able to go—and same principle should apply to the US and Canada. t o

sum up, the urgent tasks facing the Dept. and the & L ~ ^ then existing ties (including perhaps some form of Ut mem­

andum by Richard M. BiseeU, Л% has net been identified in Dep*rm»B

5 / 6 30/01/2013

FOREIGN RELATIONS, 1 9 4 9 , VOLUME IV 472 henhip in the OEEC and a reorganization of OEEC to p e r m i t

ommendations by less ffiift f a n ™ d e ™ ) > t o s»Pport and e n c 0 urage positive action under OEEC auspices to carry out the pledges of mutual aid, and simultaneously to support and encourage the French in taking the initiative in seeking Franco-German under-standing as the precondition to progress toward integration.

I beKeVe that this may be the last chance for France to take the lead in developing a pattern of organization which is vital to her needs and to the needs of Western Europe. The taking of this initiative is not a price for further US aid, and I do not believe that we should put pressure on France nor put ourselves in a position in which French failure will be a defeat for US policy. But this does represent our analysis of what is needed if Russian or German, or p>erhaps Russian-German domination, is to be avoided.

By progress toward integration, as mentioned above, I have in mind the earliest possible decision by the Europeans as to objectives and commitments among them on a timetable for the creation of supra-national institutions, operating on less than a unanimity basis, for dealing with specific economic, social, and perhaps other problems. W e do not intend to propose the precise character and scope of these institutions. The nature of the problem and the means for dealing with it are ob^ouslj more clearly understood in Western Europe than here, nsr tut ions, if they are to last, must be created by the countries who

op nioJ't! apal(V1

1?hem- B u t 1 d 0 w i s h t 0 emphasize that, in mv Se'st? d *f S h ° r t ° f t h e n e e d s o f t h e t i m e i f ^ e y did not

involve some merger of sovereignty. .CHESON

6 / 6 30/01/2013